Nearly three dozen people have been killed by white male domestic terrorists in just over a week's time.

If it wasn’t clear following last week’s mass shooting in Gilroy, California, this past weekend’s back-to-back weekend shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, respectively, exposed the nation’s lack of laws for domestic terrorism. But with officials announcing that the El Paso shooting that killed 20 people would be treated as domestic terrorism, the deadly gun violence also exposed which presidential candidates have thrown their support behind domestic terrorism legislation that has stalled in Congress.

Many politicians and pundits alike tend to use deadly episodes like the three mass shootings in the past two weeks as reasons to ramp up the rhetoric for tighter gun laws, but Senate Democrats have already taken that talk a step further by introducing Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin’s Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2019 back in March. S.894 has 19 co-sponsors. But that number was only made up of half the presidential candidates who are also Senators: New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, California Sen. Kamala Harris, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Bernie Sanders.

Conspicuously missing from that list were three other presidential candidates who are Senators: Michael Bennett of Colorado, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

That’s right, Elizabeth Warren, the person who has been lauded for having a plan for everything, has not co-sponsored the fledgling legislation against domestic terrorism, an issue that has been pushed to the forefront in just one week’s time.

Warren did recently denounce white supremacy as domestic terrorism, but her efforts to get a law passed about it have been unclear aside from what appears to be her absence from being involved in the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2019.

Meanwhile, the co-sponsorship by Booker, Harris and Klobuchar immediately gives them a ton of political capital on the topic that is bound to dominate future presidential debates and interviews as the country grapples with the fallout from a problem it doesn’t seem properly equipped to answer. However, since Klobuchar has become a fringe candidate whose campaign may not even last until the next debate, Booker and Harris — the latter of whom has flirted with being a frontrunner among Democrats — could emerge as difference-makers on helping to get the domestic terrorism law on the books.

There was also the House’s Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2019 for which at least one prominent Congresswoman running for president has not signed on.

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act is specifically designed to address and specifically NAMES White Nationalism as a terror threat. It only has 10 co-sponsors in the House. Why isn't 2020 candidate @TulsiGabbard on this bill ? https://t.co/YXHVxBegYV

The idea of investigating the El Paso shooting as domestic terrorism was also interesting because even though mass shootings disproportionately waged by white American males have been on the rise for almost a quarter of a century, Esquire reminded readers in June that “the Department of Justice cannot label such acts as terrorism because there is no law under which they can do it.”

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act expands “the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating ‘terrorism’” but “does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism.”

All of which emphasizes why Durbin’s bill was especially important in the wake of this weekend’s carnage that on face value certainly seemed deserving of being labeled domestic terrorism. The El Paso shooter, who police managed to arrest, reportedly left behind a racist manifesto that indicated he traveled more than 10 hours by car to the border town in order to kill “Hispanics.” Not only does that type of premeditation mandate a hate crime charge, but domestic terror also fits perfectly into that narrative.

Aside from the requisite “thoughts and prayers” offered by politicians following mass shootings, it will be interesting to see how sitting U.S. Senators try to explain why they did not co-sponsor Durbin’s bill that has now taken on an added sense of urgency.

4. Julián Castro

5. John Delaney

Source:Getty
5 of 24

6. Tulsi Gabbard

Source:Getty
6 of 24

7. Kirsten Gillibrand

Source:Getty
7 of 24

8. Mike Gravel

Source:Getty
8 of 24

9. Kamala Harris

I had just a few seconds left before my interview with Sen. Kamala Harris was about to wrap, so I asked about reparations for Black Americans (the context of the interview was her proposed policy agenda for Black America).

11. Jay Inslee

On the issue of reparations to descendants of slaves: "We have a history in this country that we need to remedy," and we should look at things "that have the broadest applications to do that," says @JayInslee. What we should do "should focus on ending inter-generational poverty." pic.twitter.com/c8inmxiQSs

16. Tim Ryan

Source:Getty
16 of 24

17. Bernie Sanders

Bernie is not saying he *supports* #hr40 reparations commission, he's saying IF the House and Senate passed it, he would sign it, i.e. he would not veto it. Then there's a BUT. #NANConv2019pic.twitter.com/RamLIe5VPD

22. Bill Weld

23. Marianne Williamson

24. Andrew Yang

24 of 24

Continue reading Where All The Presidential Candidates Stand On Reparations, In Their Own Words

Where All The Presidential Candidates Stand On Reparations, In Their Own Words

UPDATED: 10:20 a.m. EDT, June 19 --
The House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties was holding a hearing on the reparations for slavery in what could be the beginning of progress being made on the contentious topic that has become a talking point on the 2020 campaign trail.
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, who is running for president, was scheduled to testify. After finding himself lagging in national polls, his testimony on Wednesday could further contextualize his stated position for reparations as well as give his candidacy an added boost.
You can watch a live stream of the House hearing below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_mfXUndW80
Booker introduced his own reparations legislation in April that was a companion piece to Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee's own House resolution on reparations. "I am proud to introduce legislation that will finally address many of our country’s policies—rooted in a history of slavery and white supremacy—that continue to erode Black communities, perpetuate racism and implicit bias, and widen the racial wealth gap,” Booker tweeted at the time.
https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1115308751232425984
As we inch closer to primary season, perhaps no other single topic has managed to get as much attention as the argument surrounding reparations for descendants of slaves.
READ MORE: Americans Appear Ready To Support Reparations: Report
While rhetoric surrounding reparations has died down as of recently, Wednesday's testimony was expected to thrust it back in the national spotlight, much like when a handful of candidates took the podium at the Rev. Al Sharpton's annual National Action Network convention in April to explain their plans for Black America should they be elected president. Each person was asked about his or her stance on using reparations to compensate Black descendants of slaves, and some of the responses left much to be desired.
One thing's for sure: With talk about reparations being at a fever pitch during this election cycle, 2020 candidates better get well versed in the subject so as to not come across as uninformed.
READ MORE: U.S. Owes Reparations To African-Americans, UN Experts Say
Author Ta-Nehisi Coates, who was also set to testify on Wednesday, penned an essay in 2014 titled “The Case for Reparations” that laid out an argument in support of America making amends for centuries of disadvantaged generations of Black people. When Coates’ essay was published just five short years ago, only 6 percent of whites supported cash payments to the descendants of slaves, while only 19 percent of whites supported special education and job training programs to them. Now, a growing percentage of whites, Blacks, Independents, Democrats and Republicans said they believe the federal government doesn’t spend enough money on improving the conditions of African-Americans, according to the 2018 General Social Survey.
All that to say, there certainly is a ton of uncertainty surrounding the fate of reparations for Black people in America. Scroll down to see where all of the declared White House candidates stand, or sit, on the topic.